International Football - England - Euros - World Cup Etc

[Salvatore Matrecano]

VAR re-referees yet another game and denies yet another brilliant sporting moment for Croatia.

[JohnG]

"Replays on television were inconclusive to the human eye, but FIFA's Connected Ball Technology picked up a microscopic acceleration spike"

Microscopic fgs

[Sausage Roll]

I'm more sympathetic towards VAR than most but stuff like this does make a mockery of the whole 'only being used to correct clear and obvious errors' thing.

[wassy04]

I'm more sympathetic towards VAR than most but stuff like this does make a mockery of the whole 'only being used to correct clear and obvious errors' thing.

VAR sucks and I'd rather they just binned it.

However, if you are going to have it, surely using tech for a decision like this is better than two guys on the field guessing? If it goes the other way, linesman flags for offside and then it's given on review, would the reaction be the same?

[JohnG]

The cynical side of me is in two minds about whether a very marginal one would go with the team with the celeb player. It was given on field, no way a "microscopic spike" and not being able to tell visually is a clear and obvious error

[Paplane]

I didn't see the game live so I'm not caught up in the emotion of the situation. Therefore, if there's been a touch picked up by this snicko technology then that's fair enough in my opinion. Its when something's subjective, and the referee/var makes a call when other refs would have judged it differently, that's when I have a problem. Like Kane's panalty decision the other night.

[Salvatore Matrecano]

Snicko technology in cricket fine. In football don’t be ridiculous.
If you actually let refs and assistants do the job they are paid to do my guess is Croatia’s goal may have been ruled out in real time because naked eye it looked like a flick on. Those type of calls right or wrong I could live with because it keeps with the emotion of the game. VAR saps every last ounce of emotion from the game.

By the way I thought they got the Kane penalty call correct and fair play to the ref there because most PL refs would give it. Harry knew what he was doing in my opinion.

[Sausage Roll]

Agree with you on Kane's non-penalty. He definitely went looking for that contact.

[wassy04]

Disagree on Kane's one, the reason he was off balance was the defender behind him clearly pushes him, not enough for a foul in its own right probably but enough to put him off balance so he is already falling when he gets taken out by the keeper.

[Paplane]

Snicko technology in cricket fine. In football don’t be ridiculous.
If you actually let refs and assistants do the job they are paid to do my guess is Croatia’s goal may have been ruled out in real time because naked eye it looked like a flick on. Those type of calls right or wrong I could live with because it keeps with the emotion of the game. VAR saps every last ounce of emotion from the game.

By the way I thought they got the Kane penalty call correct and fair play to the ref there because most PL refs would give it. Harry knew what he was doing in my opinion.

Firstly, having a quick look this morning, I'm not sure it did look like there had been a a flick on. So what's the ref to do, guess, make a decision based on his gut feeling or the emotion of the situation? He has to be fair to both sides. If there's technology there, then we should make the maximum use out of it.

And re your second point, Kane's pen was 50/50. Yes, he knew what he was doing, all strikers do, but it's not incumbent upon him to endeavor to stop himself being fouled. In other words, he's not obliged to jump over the keeper's arms. I accept in that situation it's harsh when decisions go against you when you're the defending team.

[Plymouth red]

I agree - it makes sense that in cricket it is used as the very purpose of the sport is to get batsmen out. In football it's stupid. So it might have touched a bit of hair - the direction of the ball nor the speed changed. Okay so him jumping for the ball meant the defender behind him was blindsided but the jumper was not offside.

What I would like them to take from cricket is things like umpires call. If no obvious mistake has been made by the ref or it's subjective and marginal then it goes with the decision on the pitch. I also think a maximum time an incident can be reviewed should be applied before going with the on field decision - sometimes it can be 3-4 minute to decide if a toe nail is offside. Finally I would be happy for teams to have var reviews like in test cricket. Each team has two which can be used on certain incidents - var then only gets involved either when the ref requests it or a team requests it. I feel something needs to happen because currently the system is just rubbish

[Sausage Roll]

I agree - it makes sense that in cricket it is used as the very purpose of the sport is to get batsmen out. In football it's stupid. So it might have touched a bit of hair - the direction of the ball nor the speed changed. Okay so him jumping for the ball meant the defender behind him was blindsided but the jumper was not offside.

What I would like them to take from cricket is things like umpires call. If no obvious mistake has been made by the ref or it's subjective and marginal then it goes with the decision on the pitch. I also think a maximum time an incident can be reviewed should be applied before going with the on field decision - sometimes it can be 3-4 minute to decide if a toe nail is offside. Finally I would be happy for teams to have var reviews like in test cricket. Each team has two which can be used on certain incidents - var then only gets involved either when the ref requests it or a team requests it. I feel something needs to happen because currently the system is just rubbish

The 'umpires call' thing has kinda been unofficially happening in this World Cup. I can't recall too many of the subjective decisions being overturned. Like the Kane one for example again.